(Ed. Note: based on the revelations in this post, we will henceforth refer to Brunswick Community United (BCU) as “Brunswick Community Unionists,” which more accurately reflects their allegiance.)
Setting the Stage
“Brunswick has the best schools!” (Frequently claimed by Sally Sellit and others who assert that people move to Brunswick only because of the schools.)
“Brunswick schools have excellent teachers!” (Enraptured parents affirming that they’ve placed their children in superior learning situations.)
“Brunswick kids are great students!” (“I don’t know about your kids, buy mine are incredibly talented.”)
Such are the three prongs of communal self-esteem deriving from Brunswick’s government run schools. Inquiring minds might ask what specifically is meant by “best,” “excellent,” and “great.” “Best schools” obviously doesn’t refer to physical school assets, since we’re heading towards tearing down and replacing three of the five schools still standing. It’s a Brunswick thing, you know.
Even more, we’d ask what objective info the speakers have to substantiate their claims.
“The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of the holder's lack of rational conviction.”
- Bertrand Russell, Skeptical Essays
Challenging such indefinite but passionately held views is tantamount to telling a parent that neither Brunswick or its schools are superior, that they are sending their kids to schools that have poor as well as good teachers, and that not every child is above average. You can’t get very far with such a position, and so we have the completely lopsided dialogue over school budgets. All but a very few are too intimidated to say anything that might be labeled anti-school and anti-child.
The School Establishment’s One Note Serenade
With the foregoing as context, consider these recent citations in a Forecaster article:
“We’re tasked with ensuring that each student in Brunswick receives an adequate education, and I don’t think that’s enough,” Vice Chairwoman Michele Joyce said. “Let’s change that expectation from adequate to excellent.
Alright, Michele, all we ask is that you clearly define what you mean by adequate and excellent. Write it up, and we’ll publish it right here. Because we need a way to measure the results.
The state continues to give to give us challenges and one of the latest is publicly funded charter schools. Let’s keep Brunswick students in Brunswick by providing an excellent education for all of our students.”
Great idea; isn’t it time for Brunswick to prove to parents that the town’s government run schools are the best choice for their children? This is the essence of the Charter School movement – creating competition in what has been a government sanctioned monopoly.
Chairman Jim Grant addressed budget concerns for residents without children in Brunwick’s (sic) school district.
“One of the things I’m asked a lot by people that don’t have children, like myself, or the elderly, is ‘why is it that we pay to schools?’ and the answer has always been, ‘it benefits the community,’” Grant said.
We can think of a zillion things that would ‘benefit the community’ in the broadest sense if taxpayers funded it. We’d like to think that Grant can come up with something more profound, but maybe we expect too much.
“… I can’t answer that anymore because now our dollars are going outside of this town to fund what is essentially a private education through public dollars.
As we see it, Brunswick taxpayer dollars paying to educate Brunswick resident children is not ‘dollars going outside of this town.’ You just said that educating the kids “benefits the community.” Do those home-schooling their kids “benefit the community?” Or those who send them to private schools?
“I think it’s irresponsible if we continue to allow money to leave this district that the taxpayers put into it, so yes, I’m going to ask them to pay a little bit more in the hope that more of it stays here.”
The School Department is proposing a $35 million budget for the coming year. Are you really asking us to believe that reallocating less than 1% of that to another school is a back-breaker? Especially when you’re sending the Charter School less than we provide you for each pupil? Sounds from here like this is a $ saver for the town.
Given our opening words, and related school board rhetoric, we wonder how having “the best schools” could be reconciled with providing an “adequate” education. So which is it; are our schools “the best,” of just “adequate?” We don’t see how you can possibly be both, unless the state of public education has sunk even lower than we thought.
One might ask those responsible to define “adequate” and “excellent” in measurable educational terms, instead of using them as emotional trigger words. Good luck on that; measurability is a profane concept in the halls of education and the halls of the teachers union. Or maybe Ms. Joyce would rather correct Sally Sellit the next time she says how great our schools are, and tell her they are just ‘adequate.’
What’s a little cognitive dissonance amongst friends, right? Maybe The Ostrich can sort this all out for us.
All of the above posturing is textbook ‘spend more’ rhetoric, completely devoid of any details or specific references to education fundamentals. It is designed solely to create a local ‘mandate’ for raising taxes through our predatory adjustable rate property tax.
Clearly, the School Board, the School Department, the assorted schoolies and Brunswick Community Unionists all equate spending, and more importantly spending increases, to school excellence. Which always leads one to ask “just how much would be enough?”
This view is like rating how good as parents you are by how much you spend on your kids.
And how good a cook you are by how much you spend on groceries.
Not to mention how good a golfer you are by how expensive your golf outfits are.
It should be obvious that being a better, or the best parent, cook, or golfer has very little to do with how much you spend on the effort, as is true for most of life’s pursuits. Instead, it depends on strong principles, attention to detail, and mastering the fundamentals, with a good dose of performance assessment.
“You can govern or you can spend.”
We’re pretty sure we’ve quoted this pithy observation many times before, but you can’t be reminded of it too often. It refers to typically ignored meanings of the word govern, which include “to exercise a directing or restraining influence over,” and “to hold in check.” Think of a governor on a car or engine that limits speed, so it doesn’t race out of your control.
There is another sense of the word: “to rule over by right of authority,” which is the interpretation preferred by most in elected office, and appointed offices as well.
“It’s for the children.”
We’ve referred to this phrase countless times as well, because it’s the proven, all-purpose mantra of government school advocates as they seek to embarrass, demonize, and silence those who would challenge them in any regard, almost always while distracting from the facts of the matter.
Combine the two sayings, and you have the core of our main thesis.
“Critical thinking” is a concept enjoying some resurgence in public interest as Bowdoin’s intellectual foundations undergo examination at the national level. See this post to be reminded of that discussion.
Our long held view is that the government school establishment has long insisted that spending is the only true measure of excellence, and that more importantly, increase in spending is the only meaningful indicator of community commitment to school success.
So bear with us as we attempt to think critically on school excellence. It appears to us that three factors have the greatest influence on achieving excellence, as distinct from just claiming it.
The first factor is curriculum: what do our schools teach? Does what they teach really matter? Is it the fundamental, mandatory skills and knowledge necessary to make a successful life for yourself? What used to be know as the “three R’s,” along with contemporary extensions of the same need for rudimentary ability to prosper in the modern era?
Or is it more focused on the fashionable social and cultural puffery of our day, as exemplified by this course description in the Bowdoin catalog?
212 Gender, Sexuality, and Schooling.
Schools are sites where young people learn to “do” gender and sexuality through direct instruction, the hidden curriculum, and peer-to-peer learning. In schools, gender and sexuality are challenged, constrained, constructed, normalized, and performed. Explores instructional and curricular reforms that have attempted to address students’ and teachers’ sexual identities and behavior. Examines the effects of gender and sexual identity on students’ experience of school, their academic achievement, and the work of teaching. Topics may include Compulsory Heterosexuality in the Curriculum; The Gender of the Good Student and Good Teacher; Sex Ed in an Age of Abstinence.
How much of the curriculum consists of videos and other prepackaged materials projected over “technology resources” that require constant upgrades?
As we understand it, curriculum is handed down by a central authority in the school department. The 2nd grade curriculum is the 2nd grade curriculum. It doesn’t matter how experienced or inexperienced the teacher is, or whether they make $35,000 per year or twice that; they are required to teach the same things.
While we’re on the subject, is there a single central location where a parent or taxpayer can go to examine all the textbooks and other materials used in all grades from K through 12? It might be very interesting to spend an hour or two thumbing through the materials for each grade.
The second factor is the students: what expectations do we place upon them to study, work, and master what the system attempts to teach them? How are these expectations expressed in writing and in policy that anyone can examine?
Do we expect and inspire them to succeed, or do we simply see them as seat-takers who drive revenue and consume subsidized meals? Does making the honor roll really mean something, or are we more into ‘everyone needs affirmation’ modernity?
Do we give seat-time promotions? Does the possibility of being held back even exist any more as an incentive to keep up? Are there any consequences of being a slacker, or are you simply moved along with your classmates (‘peers’) because it’s just easier?
It goes without saying that expectations for students are tightly coupled to the expectations parents place upon them and the school system. In the same way, expectations placed upon students necessarily reflect back to parents and their involvement in their children’s success. What expectations are placed upon parents, and are they detailed in written policy?
The third factor is the teachers: what do we expect of them, and how do we measure and confirm they meet these expectations? Where are these expectations documented and viewable?
To begin with, their compensation package is antithetical to any rational concept of excellence and performance. Teacher salary progression is based almost entirely on time in grade, with no dependence on performance or merit. Do the time, and you get the increase. Even though you are teaching to exactly the same curriculum as the teacher who is 15 years your junior, and making far less for the same task.
So what is our point?
Here we are, faced with the standard budget propaganda of the Brunswick School Board and the School Superintendent. The School Board is the elected governing body charged with overseeing the Brunswick School Department, and therefore its state of adequacy and/or excellence.
(Brunswick Community Unionists are probably getting lovely new signs printed, or maybe they’re just going to use the ones from last year. They should be appearing any day on a property near you. Given the figures rolling out in the news, ‘invest in our schools’ seems way too understated. We’re thinking more like “Imagine your future; go without for our schools.”)
The School Board is and virtually always has been a near unanimous rubber stamp operation afraid to take on the teachers, the administration, or the students and parents. So they do the only thing they know how to do: spend. And it is a metric everyone can see and judge them by. You can govern, or you can spend; they’ve made their choice, and it’s obvious.
Now that we’ve examined the three major factors in education excellence as we see it, we pose these questions:
- Have you ever heard the School Board or the Superintendent address school curriculum in public discussions, and a need to change or upgrade it to improve educational success?
- Have you ever heard the School Board or the Superintendent talk about student expectations in any regard in public discussions?
- Have you ever heard the School Board or the Superintendent address teacher accountability and performance measurement as vital to system success?
If you’re like us, your answer to all three of these questions is “no.”
And you need to ask why this is. Instead of buying into the spend more, spend lots more shouts of BCU, and the ‘it’s for the children’ chanting of the School Administrator and his captive School Board.
If you don’t, you’ll confirm that you really aren’t for the children, and that you would much rather roll over and have your tummy tickled.
Some other questions we’ll leave for interested students:
- If dollars drive excellence, why isn’t ours growing by leaps and bounds? Per student spending is doubling for the last 10 years, and is up by $3,000 per student in the last 4 years alone, or approx. 25%.
- Can you name a parent who would say their child’s teacher is less than the best? Self-denial is a great defense mechanism.
- Shouldn’t education professionals (teachers) be insulted by the inference that they’ll do a better job teaching our kids next year than this year if we pay them more? For doing the same thing?
- Why do we have graduates that can’t make change? And adults that can’t read? How can you graduate from high school as a functional illiterate?
- Why do 50% of incoming community college students need remediation coursework, and 25% of those entering UM System four year programs?
- Since Maine has the lowest student to teacher ratio in the nation, and spends 50% more per student per year than the national average, shouldn’t our achievement be sky high?
Let us leave you one more favorite of the school advocate chorus.
“You get what you pay for.”
And they’re absolutely right; when you increase teacher salaries, you get higher paid teachers. See? They’re right!
Summary:
They say ‘it’s for the children,’ which we’ve argued a number of times, in a number of different ways, is not at all true (in numerous prior posts.)
But here’s what is true, and it cannot be argued: ‘it’s from the taxpayers.’
Now don’t forget to be a good parent to that swell young golfer of yours! And keep your receipts, so we can see how much you spend on him.
PS: about that elephant
Maybe you’ve noticed the elephant in the post. It’s meant to remind you that there’s a huge elephant hanging out in Brunswick’s Council Meeting room, where budgets are presented, discussed, and deliberated. Too bad we can’t get anyone to notice it and do something about it. It’s standing there in plain view of the council, but the elephant can’t get their attention. Maybe it’s because he’s wearing a blanket that says “it’s for the children.”
The elephant we refer to is the $40-50 million school renovation bill we’re about to get hit with, but isn’t being discussed in the coming sessions.
Lucky for the elephant, he doesn’t pay property taxes.
No comments:
Post a Comment